I was thinking about all the things that has took human lives and havent been scrutenized as much as firearms. Here is what ive came up with:

Alcohol- DUIs cause way too many deaths every year yet no complete ban on alcohol
Tobacco- The effects of both first hand and second hand smoking are very dangerous yet outside of no smoking indoors no one has banned smoking all together
Motor vehicles- From people racing down the freeway to true accidents vehicles have been causing deaths since Mr Ford created the first one.
Aircraft- Plane crashes, and in flight accidents dont happen often but when they do they can take hundreds of lives at a time. Yet we arent grounding flights because they are unsafe

Not a single one of these are protected by the Constitution and yet no one has tried to derail them. I would love to see the statistic on how many people have been killed by people with registered firearms vs. how many people have been killed by guns acquired illegally
Rant over

BlindRacer

01-04-2011, 4:08 PM

It's not about safety. It's about control. You disarm the common citizen, and he then becomes a subject, which will be more easily controlled, and who will then grow dependent on the ruling class for more and more.

hawk81

01-04-2011, 4:13 PM

Why only guns? Because the elite want to control you and they don't want you to be able to say no, and fight back.

I was thinking about all the things that has took human lives and havent been scrutenized as much as firearms. Here is what ive came up with:

Alcohol- DUIs cause way too many deaths every year yet no complete ban on alcohol
Tobacco- The effects of both first hand and second hand smoking are very dangerous yet outside of no smoking indoors no one has banned smoking all together
Motor vehicles- From people racing down the freeway to true accidents vehicles have been causing deaths since Mr Ford created the first one.
Aircraft- Plane crashes, and in flight accidents dont happen often but when they do they can take hundreds of lives at a time. Yet we arent grounding flights because they are unsafe

Not a single one of these are protected by the Constitution and yet no one has tried to derail them. I would love to see the statistic on how many people have been killed by people with registered firearms vs. how many people have been killed by guns acquired illegally
Rant over

stix213

01-04-2011, 4:15 PM

Alcohol - They tried to ban this already if you forgot

Tobacco - I'm sure the ban will have its day

Motor Vehicles - Many of the same types of people who want guns banned would ban cars too, to force you to take public transit. Also, Ford didn't create the first automobile. He created the first Automobile assembly line. Automobiles had been driving around for some time prior, but were hand made one at a time.

Aircraft - How can you say these aren't scrutinized as much as guns? I've never had a federal officer put their hands on my genitals when buying a gun.

loosewreck

01-04-2011, 4:22 PM

Alcohol, Tobacco and Fire Arms are hot topics that get people worked up enough to get them to vote, left or right. Just depends on which politician is doing the "working-up".

sholling

01-04-2011, 4:28 PM

If you look at the whole picture you'll see it's not just guns. Leftists believe that the government needs a monopoly on force so that you cannot fight back. But it goes beyond that - a long way beyond guns... They use the tool of political correctness as both speech and thought control. For example one must not discuss Islamic terrorism without reminding all around you that "Islam is a religion of peace". Failure to toe the line on political correctness or daring to think outside the box can leave you branded a bigot or cost your your career - just ask a certain navy captain that dared to display a sense of humor that extended outside of the box established by the thought police in the media.

It also extends to private property. 100 years ago a politician that demanded that you ask permission to build on your own property or to open a business or told you how to run your business, or tried to ban defending your property would have been tared and feathered. Those rights are all gone now.

infamous209

01-04-2011, 4:33 PM

Alcohol - They tried to ban this already if you forgot

Tobacco - I'm sure the ban will have its day

Motor Vehicles - Many of the same types of people who want guns banned would ban cars too, to force you to take public transit. Also, Ford didn't create the first automobile. He created the first Automobile assembly line. Automobiles had been driving around for some time prior, but were hand made one at a time.

Aircraft - How can you say these aren't scrutinized as much as guns? I've never had a federal officer put their hands on my genitals when buying a gun.

alcohol ban didnt last, if guns get taken away they will never be returned!
Ford made it mainstream without him I feel cars would not have taken off like they did and as far as aircraft, NO ONE has said woah no more planes they are killers and made it stick, and last i checked filling out paperwork, waiting ten days, having the right to bear arms questioned and watching so many guns taken away for evil components in my opinion is worse that getting groped for 10 seconds by some over eager fed who is trying to be the guy who stops a terrorist from getting on a plane

macadamizer

01-04-2011, 4:58 PM

I was thinking about all the things that has took human lives and havent been scrutenized as much as firearms. Here is what ive came up with:

Alcohol- DUIs cause way too many deaths every year yet no complete ban on alcohol
Tobacco- The effects of both first hand and second hand smoking are very dangerous yet outside of no smoking indoors no one has banned smoking all together
Motor vehicles- From people racing down the freeway to true accidents vehicles have been causing deaths since Mr Ford created the first one.
Aircraft- Plane crashes, and in flight accidents dont happen often but when they do they can take hundreds of lives at a time. Yet we arent grounding flights because they are unsafe

Not a single one of these are protected by the Constitution and yet no one has tried to derail them. I would love to see the statistic on how many people have been killed by people with registered firearms vs. how many people have been killed by guns acquired illegally
Rant over

I am not sure where this rant is coming from. With alcohol, ignoring prohibition, there are plenty of restrictions -- you have to be 21 to purchase, every town, city, county or state can add its own restrictions (can only purchase at a state-run store, no sales on Sunday, no sales at all), you have to have a license to sell alcohol, you can be jailed for driving with a BAC of .08 or higher without any evidence of impairment, etc. Sounds like a lot of regulation to me.

Same with tobacco -- you have to be 18 to purchase, you are restricted from where you can smoke (some cities are banning smoking in your own apartment, or your own car in some cases). Again, a lot of restrictions.

You have to have a license to drive a car. And carry insurance. And pay licensing fees every year. Car manufacturers must continually add new mandatory safety features to new cars. In California, you have biannual smog checks in most counties. Again, many regulations.

In many states, it is as easy to buy a firearm as it is to buy alcohol. And if you are 18, you can buy a rifle, but not alcohol.

The restrictions for purchasing and owning firearms are many, and they are different from other restrictions, but it's certainly not correct to say that other things are unrestricted. Very little is unrestricted anymore.

Werewolf1021

01-04-2011, 5:10 PM

Alcohol - They tried to ban this already if you forgot

Tobacco - I'm sure the ban will have its day

Motor Vehicles - Many of the same types of people who want guns banned would ban cars too, to force you to take public transit. Also, Ford didn't create the first automobile. He created the first Automobile assembly line. Automobiles had been driving around for some time prior, but were hand made one at a time.

Aircraft - How can you say these aren't scrutinized as much as guns? I've never had a federal officer put their hands on my genitals when buying a gun.

You mean that isn't part of buying a handgun? I feel so violated....:(

:D:D

VAReact

01-04-2011, 5:20 PM

Alcohol - They tried to ban this already if you forgot

Tobacco - I'm sure the ban will have its day

Motor Vehicles - Many of the same types of people who want guns banned would ban cars too, to force you to take public transit. Also, Ford didn't create the first automobile. He created the first Automobile assembly line. Automobiles had been driving around for some time prior, but were hand made one at a time.

Aircraft - How can you say these aren't scrutinized as much as guns? I've never had a federal officer put their hands on my genitals when buying a gun.

You mean that isn't part of buying a handgun? I feel so violated....:(

:D:D

:rofl2: I guess I'd better not mention what happened to ME the last time I bought a handgun...still trying to forget!

shy 7th

01-04-2011, 5:31 PM

I hate the way people use (and believe) statistics... "look at the total this compared to the total that and this is so much worse, yada, yada"

Whenever I see statistics posted, I alway try to imagine what the statistics would look like if they had a "per encounter" statistic:

Like when people say "you are much more likely to be stung by a bee than be eaten by a shark so therefore the fear of sharks is irrational." While the numbers support this, you have to realize that people encounter bees every day of their life, but most people will go their whole lives without ever swimming in the ocean, let alone encountering a shark. However, on a per encounter basis, sharks are much more dangerous than the statistics would have you believe... put someone in a room with a killer bee... and most likely nothing will happen. They might squish the bee with their shoe... Put someone in a tank with a great white and their most likely f**ked.

To use the car example:
Sure n number of people died driving on the 405 yesterday, but if you look at the overall picture, n*1000000000 people drove (or parked :rolleyes: ) on the 405 at the same time and didn't die. And they will drive on that highway everyday to and from work. The per encounter statistics for automobile deaths would make the argument very weak.

I'm sure if you gave everyone a gun and made them use it every day or as often or for as long as they drive their car the number "incidents" involving firearms would be staggering. But judging by the way people drive... I don't think I would trust them with a firearm.

So the trick with statistics is they can say whatever the sayer wants... like the traced guns in mexico thing. Your job is to take them with a grain of salt.

infamous209

01-04-2011, 5:47 PM

I guess my rant is coming from the fact that at every turn there is a new law coming into effect that makes owning and firing a gun a little harder. I have never seen the government try so hard to stop something. If they cant take your gun they will take a certain type of them so they can say look you can still own those just not these, then they go for ammo, it seemed for a while ammo shelves everywhere were empty, then it recovered now this new law is the next step in saying your only allowed X amount of ammo a year. Without ammo a gun becomes a stick or a rock. Im not the only one who sees this fine line between right and wrong being erased.

macadamizer

01-04-2011, 5:54 PM

I guess my rant is coming from the fact that at every turn there is a new law coming into effect that makes owning and firing a gun a little harder. I have never seen the government try so hard to stop something. If they cant take your gun they will take a certain type of them so they can say look you can still own those just not these, then they go for ammo, it seemed for a while ammo shelves everywhere were empty, then it recovered now this new law is the next step in saying your only allowed X amount of ammo a year. Without ammo a gun becomes a stick or a rock. Im not the only one who sees this fine line between right and wrong being erased.

Then you aren't looking hard enough. Hell, California has banned the sale of incandescent 100W light bulbs. There are all sorts of things being banned and restricted if you just look.

vantec08

01-04-2011, 6:24 PM

why only guns? because its much easier to demonize inanimate objects than hold criminals, who are the constituency of one major political party, accountable.

Librarian

01-04-2011, 6:33 PM

To use the car example:
Sure n number of people died driving on the 405 yesterday, but if you look at the overall picture, n*1000000000 people drove (or parked :rolleyes: ) on the 405 at the same time and didn't die. And they will drive on that highway everyday to and from work. The per encounter statistics for automobile deaths would make the argument very weak.

I'm sure if you gave everyone a gun and made them use it every day or as often or for as long as they drive their car the number "incidents" involving firearms would be staggering. But judging by the way people drive... I don't think I would trust them with a firearm.

So the trick with statistics is they can say whatever the sayer wants... like the traced guns in mexico thing. Your job is to take them with a grain of salt.

First noting that very few people can be convinced to switch positions based on statistics...

Auto injury/death data is available on 'miles traveled', but no such info is available for 'exposures to guns'. We could probably say #sworn LEO/3 * population in district of agency *24 hours to get something like 'hours of exposure to guns by citizens due to police' and compare that to 'shootings by police' to get some nice-sounding number, but as to civilian use? No data.

OTOH, it's important to remember that those auto injuries/deaths are almost all accidents, happening mostly to licensed drivers using registered vehicles on government-maintained roads and highways. Firearm deaths/injuries are almost all deliberate acts by a person choosing to load a firearm, aim it at another human being (or oneself) and then fire.

Firearms are doing what they are supposed to do; obviously, cars are far more dangerous, since even used properly they are involved in 40% more deaths by accident (2007:42K) then firearms are by intent (2007:30K).

E Pluribus Unum

01-04-2011, 6:33 PM

I was thinking about all the things that has took human lives and havent been scrutenized as much as firearms. Here is what ive came up with:

I stopped reading after the first sentence. Jebus man, I hate grammar nazis, but dang!

wjc

01-04-2011, 8:38 PM

I will give up my bow and arrow when they pry it from my cold, dead hands! :D

Seriously...

Guns are the most technologically advanced means at our disposal to prevent
our subjugation. The gubmint doesn't like them because they can't get control...anti's don't like them because the are either ignorant of their role as tools or just plain scared.

juicemansam

01-05-2011, 3:35 AM

Why only guns? Because those that come to collect are also the ones that would disarm us. Well, technically, and unfortunately, it would be one of us doing the collecting and disarming for them.

Wherryj

01-05-2011, 8:59 AM

I was thinking about all the things that has took human lives and havent been scrutenized as much as firearms. Here is what ive came up with:

Alcohol- DUIs cause way too many deaths every year yet no complete ban on alcohol
Tobacco- The effects of both first hand and second hand smoking are very dangerous yet outside of no smoking indoors no one has banned smoking all together
Motor vehicles- From people racing down the freeway to true accidents vehicles have been causing deaths since Mr Ford created the first one.
Aircraft- Plane crashes, and in flight accidents dont happen often but when they do they can take hundreds of lives at a time. Yet we arent grounding flights because they are unsafe

Not a single one of these are protected by the Constitution and yet no one has tried to derail them. I would love to see the statistic on how many people have been killed by people with registered firearms vs. how many people have been killed by guns acquired illegally
Rant over

Karl Benz is most often credited for creating the first "modern-day" automobile. Henry Ford is credited with developing the factory process that allowed mass production. Stream powered vehicles can be traced back to the 1700s with Nicolas Joseph Cugnot and others.

cyrus

01-05-2011, 11:55 AM

I was thinking about all the things that has took human lives and havent been scrutenized as much as firearms. Here is what ive came up with:

Alcohol- DUIs cause way too many deaths every year yet no complete ban on alcohol
Tobacco- The effects of both first hand and second hand smoking are very dangerous yet outside of no smoking indoors no one has banned smoking all together
Motor vehicles- From people racing down the freeway to true accidents vehicles have been causing deaths since Mr Ford created the first one.
Aircraft- Plane crashes, and in flight accidents dont happen often but when they do they can take hundreds of lives at a time. Yet we arent grounding flights because they are unsafe

You forgot

Sex

Food

Exercising such as swimming

quiet-wyatt

01-05-2011, 1:58 PM

Then you aren't looking hard enough. Hell, California has banned the sale of incandescent 100W light bulbs. There are all sorts of things being banned and restricted if you just look.

Plus they tried to ban black-painted cars because they used more air-conditioning due to the color of paint absorbing more heat, therefore it uses more gas, therefore it's making us more dependant on foriegn oil, therefore.... On and on it goes...

http://techcrunch.com/2009/03/26/california-may-ban-black-cars/#

Reductio

01-05-2011, 2:01 PM

:rofl2: I guess I'd better not mention what happened to ME the last time I bought a handgun...still trying to forget!

Hope you got a good discount. :D

American Insurgent

01-05-2011, 2:03 PM

Why only guns? Because the elite want to control you and they don't want you to be able to say no, and fight back.

Took the words right outta my mouth!!!!

Bhobbs

01-05-2011, 2:03 PM

The banning of guns follows a logical path. Which is more scary to an uneducated person? An Ar15 or a 747? Deaths caused by guns are horrible and guns should be banned. Deaths caused by aircraft accidents are tragic and lessons are learned to prevent it from happening again but there are risks involved in flying that everyone knows of.

Not a single one of these are protected by the Constitution and yet no one has tried to derail them. I would love to see the statistic on how many people have been killed by people with registered firearms vs. how many people have been killed by guns acquired illegally
Rant over

There was an interesting FBI study I read, I think it was done back in 2004 or there abouts, maybe 2006. What they looked at was for that year nationwide there was a total of 39 LEOs (local, state, fed combined) that were shot and killed on duty. What the study found was that of the 39, 38 of them were shot by persons who had illegally obtained the weapon or were other prohibited posessors.

So what does that tell you? It tells me me that Law-abiding gunowners dont go around shooting at COPs, and that you can place all the laws and restrictions you want on law-abiding people obtaining and carrying firearms and it wont make a difference because criminals dont care about the law and will get weapons by other means.

infamous209

01-05-2011, 3:51 PM

There was an interesting FBI study I read, I think it was done back in 2004 or there abouts, maybe 2006. What they looked at was for that year nationwide there was a total of 39 LEOs (local, state, fed combined) that were shot and killed on duty. What the study found was that of the 39, 38 of them were shot by persons who had illegally obtained the weapon or were other prohibited posessors.

So what does that tell you? It tells me me that Law-abiding gunowners dont go around shooting at COPs, and that you can place all the laws and restrictions you want on law-abiding people obtaining and carrying firearms and it wont make a difference because criminals dont care about the law and will get weapons by other means.

my point exactly, this subject makes me so frustrated, and it seems it will never end.

hnoppenberger

01-05-2011, 3:58 PM

It's not about safety. It's about control. You disarm the common citizen, and he then becomes a subject, which will be more easily controlled, and who will then grow dependent on the ruling class for more and more.

that is what its ALL about. gun laws are bad jokes.

botsdots

01-05-2011, 3:58 PM

You guys are missing the point. If we outlaw firearms entirely, then law abiding citizens wouldn't have them to be stolen by the criminals. Pretty simple solution as I see it.

N6ATF

01-05-2011, 4:02 PM

Oh, they'd be stolen by the criminals (the traitors to humankind and COTUS who enforce the outlawing of them).

infamous209

01-05-2011, 4:07 PM

You guys are missing the point. If we outlaw firearms entirely, then law abiding citizens wouldn't have them to be stolen by the criminals. Pretty simple solution as I see it.

Alcohol, Tobacco and Fire Arms are hot topics that get people worked up enough to get them to vote, left or right. Just depends on which politician is doing the "working-up".

I am so worked up, I had to have a shot of whiskey to calm my nerves, since that didn't work I lit up a smoke and had a beer. To help even further I had another shot and went out and popped off a few rounds. Felt a little better, so I went out and pulled the lever for my favorite politician.

GunOwner

01-05-2011, 4:59 PM

I agree with vantec08. I have gone on this same rant before - Why guns? Three main reasons that immediately come to mind: 1) Because gun owners are the minority, 2) the majority like alcohol, cars and planes and 3) the media negative spin on guns and gun ownership.

So they don't really care if cars or drunk drivers (or aspirin) kill MORE people than guns every year because to take them away would be inconvenient to the majority. It is not really about public safety it is about the majority's IGNORANCE of the cost of losing their gun rights. They don't own guns now so they don't lose anything if the rights go away and they believe the lies that the world will be safer propaganda that the media shovels out.

The other posters to the contrary are playing games with the issue. To say we need a license to drive a car and have to be 18 to buy cigarettes as if it is the same is being obtuse or worse. They are not trying to ban cars and planes - correct? We have no government officials that have publicly stated that their goal is to ban them - do we? Whereas you have the former speaker of house (and others) saying she would like to ban ALL guns.

The other issue they overlook is THE CONSTITUTION, I have a SPECIFICALLY articulated right in the constitution to OWN AND BEAR arms. Yet despite that we have elected politicians publicly calling for a ban - THAT is why my brother asks WHY GUNS.

The real point of the rant is when so many other things cause so many more deaths per year, including aspirin and many many other things that are NOT regulated at all, it is certainly fair to say why guns.

The ultimate answer is as others have stated - CONTROL. That is why we have to fight the good fight.

why only guns? because its much easier to demonize inanimate objects than hold criminals, who are the constituency of one major political party, accountable.

burr2of4

01-05-2011, 5:01 PM

because a gun is the wepon of choice for a murder. if somone is going to try to kill somone else odds are their going to use a gun.

GunOwner

01-05-2011, 5:06 PM

and the odds are if the potential LAW ABIDING CITIZEN victim doesn't HAVE a gun, the Murderer will succeed - CORRECT!

Or do you live is a fantasy world where you pass a law and all weapons go away - GROW UP. Then what, strong people beating up weak people?

Murder was around before guns - Cain and Able - get a Bible and read about it.

Also, are we going to ban knives next?

This is RIDICULOUS!

because a gun is the wepon of choice for a murder. if somone is going to try to kill somone else odds are their going to use a gun.